RFP 2010-RCP001 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program
Regional Logistics Plan RFP Questions/Answers
Questions asked at pre-bidding conference (November 29, 2011)
(1)Have there been any previous or partial assessments done in this region for logistics? Answer: Yes, San Francisco has used the LCAT tool to do an assessment. (It was also used by San Diego County and Los Angeles)
(2)Has the LCAT tool been used in this region for any projects prior to this one? Answer:San Francisco completed the first LCAT assessment on July 2010 and identified areas of improvement, one being the implementation of WebEOC software.
(3)Are there specific commodities you are trying to identify that are not specific to what’s in the regional catastrophic plans that were just completed? Answer: No
Questions Received after pre-bidding conference:
(4)Is there a maximum budget associated with this project? Answer: No
(5)Does UASI have a list of identified stakeholders/subject matter experts and their contact information?Answer: The stakeholders would be the UASI members. The subject matter expert on the LCAT would be Lee Dorey with Cal EMA,and he would also know the FEMA contacts for LCAT.
(6)Related to first bullet on page 5 of 19, regarding developing/improving local logistic plans. Existing local plans may vary widely in size, content and detail. Is there an existing model plan or template the contractor is expected to follow?Answer: No, the contractor would need to develop this within the scope of the project.
(7)Related to 5th item on page 6 of 19. Will this grant pay for 25% of stakeholders'/SME's time on this project or some other percentage?Answer: Grant covers 75% and jurisidictions have a required match of 25%.Will the prime contractor pay the stakeholders/SME's?Answer: No unless they are an employee of the contractor.
(8)Will this grant also pay for travel and lodging expenses of stakeholders/SMEs'. Answer: No
(9)Is there a small business set aside for this project? Answer: There are no local preferences.
(10)Should this annex address patient evacuation andtransportation? Answer: No, these should be covered in other annexes.
(11)Please describe how regional planners have been used in the region for recent RCPGP projects? (e.g., were they full-time embedded into each office?)Answer: For the most recent RCPGP project, there were four agencies that hired their own RCPGP planner (Marin, Oakland, San Francisco and Alameda) and the remainder of the agencies had a full-time “vendor” planner which was embedded in each agency.How were the planners assigned historically for past RCPGP plans? Answer: This has occurred in several different ways. Vendors have assigned a planner in each agency, there have been a combination of RCPGP planners and vendors as described above, or there have been assigned vendors who have not been embedded but meet regularly with each agency.And what does the UASI think has worked the best? Answer: There is no way to measure this, but comments from the agencies have stated that what makes the difference is not whether the planner was embedded or not, it was the competence, experience, ability to understand the agency they are working with, and how it relates to the region as a whole that made the difference.
(12)To allow the UASI to compare equal scopes of work/cost estimates, please describe the number of planners that proposers should include? Answer: The RFP specifically addresses this: “Identify, hire and supervise regional planners (specific number to be determined by vendor).
(13)To allow the UASI to compare equal scopes of work and for the sake of cost comparison, please describe the number of hours (e.g. full time, 40-hours, 20 hours/week) that is expected for each planner?Answer: See answer above
(14)Please clarify how often does the RCPGP project manager envision needing to meet with the regional planners? Answer: As often as needed in order to get guidance, feedback and validation of the product developed.